The mass shooting media frenzy is a bad game. Jim Goad wrote on this with clarity. I can't top that. There is one joy in the media coverage. It has nothing to do with the right screaming about jihad. The absolute fun he side steps though is how incredibly fast the wheels shift when the shooting is not to the media's Narrative, not FoxNews, the real media. The Virginia shooting died a quick media death because to use it as a gun control push would have forced revelation of his manifesto and the shooter's black grievances.
It seems the same has happened now with the Oregon shooter who was shooting Christians, asking them their religion prior to shooting. There will be no gun control push because to use this guy like they used Lanza and the kiddies of Sandy Hook (remember that school's choir sang at the Super Bowl two months later), they would have to dig into this guy's background. It seems very obvious that the media does not want to do that since they waited on releasing his name and magically he has no social media accounts except MySpace and a dating site. He is also mixed race and I repeat, shot Christians. On the heels of Kim Davis and in the Summer of Trump, the media will spike this story as fast as possible. Hell, "Forget Oregon's Gunman" is trending on Twitter this morning.
It's not useful and they cannot craft a Narrative, so SHUT IT DOWN. Hey, isn't football wild this fall!
I wrote a double dose of Weimerica tales this week, one for Social matter and one for here. The media sex shaming one was more for SM because it strikes at the heart of how the operations work (studies -> news reports -> beliefs) and reveals the weakness of egalitarian uber alles. I saved the pedophile one for here since it was more about the special writer they used and the dildo thing. The examples of writers and whatnot are getting worse because the things they are pushing are worse.
Weimerica never relaxes. That is part of the circus atmosphere. The anxiety adds to the ‘what’s next’ hopes and fears. When mixed with sexual politics, it is toxic. America has always been in a hurry to get somewhere, so it is natural to see it reflected in the cultural realm. The progressive steamroller needs new targets. It can always use the old tools. The driver of the steamroller is just anxious of what may happen if it stops moving. We’ll probably shoot him. They are aiming the steamroller at your sex life. Not accept and celebrating the freaks, but they are aiming at yours.
Are you having sex with the people the Left wants you to have sex with? No, do you even know who you should be having sex with? Well, listen up little Weimerican, and start having sex with who the media and academics deem proper, or else you are a racist. Oh, you’re gay and think you’re exempt and at the top of the pyramid now? Sorry, you still need to exemplify the progressive pupu platter of beliefs. Start having sex with other races, or you’re a racist. Stop discriminating on skin tone. It’s not preference; it’s racism!
Now this article is rather broad in how it spreads the racism around, but the problem in the gay community is that a lot of people say “no blacks.” It leads off with an Asian guy saying no to a black guy, and it has some half-Asian guy explaining how he can pass white for some whites to date, but shucks, gays are so damn racist! Isn’t this the same group we were told was far more multicultural and accepting from disco on through to 2015 #LoveWins? From the article:
Eric’s experience with online dating highlights another troubling possibility raised by the study’s authors, namely, that gay dating services may actually be encouraging men to sort potential partners by race—at least, more brazenly than they would in person. The authors suggest that dating services that allow users to sort others using racial categories like Grindr, Scruff, Growlr, and others may even “encourage the belief that [these categories] are useful, natural or appropriate for defining individuals and sexual (dis)interest.”Oh, the horror of people sorting people and making decisions along ethnic and racial lines. Will this oppression ever end? Note that a study came up with results that linked it to racism and the media said that this is a problem. Using race in the gay community might be helpful, since gay blacks and Latinos have astronomical rates of HIV infection. Gays may want to stay free of HIV.
The media has even turned how HIV should be discussed within the gay community. A British rag decided to spotlight a gay guy who turned the tables after bravely revealing he had HIV and being rejected. He made fun of the other guy’s fashion sense. First off, bravely revealing he has HIV sounds strange to anyone who lived through the ’90s when there was a push to go over all of one’s sexual partners with a prospective sexual partner. There was a responsibility to tell someone. This now is framed as a brave revelation, when it was formerly a duty or expectation. The media sides with brave HIV boy and chastises the poor fashion guy who doesn’t want the complication of HIV in his life.
This is openly shaming someone for not putting his life at risk. He wants to remain alive, and is making a smart choice.
Oh, but that is a problem, too. You thought the gays could navigate their dating world, where 20% of them have HIV/AIDS and maybe take a no-HIV stance? Sorry, that is problematic, as well. Discriminating against HIV carriers is a problem, and it is hurtful and unfair. It will even put you more at risk. Up is down, water is not wet, avoiding HIV positive partners makes you more at risk to get HIV. This is negative society. This is actually an older idea they have tried to push. The HIV+ gay crowd is angry. Why must they be segregated and rejected by the 80% who are not infected? This is discrimination!
Gays are not the only ones. American heterosexuals are too big of a crowd to blatantly call racist for not dating outseid their race, but the messaging is huge and decades long. How else would Rae Dawn Chong and Halle Berry have careers, if it were not as the hot black chick who can reasonably seduce a white man? Do not look at their 23andme results; they are “black.” Same goes for every cool black guy with a thin, white girlfriend/wife in television ads. The push is real because twenty years ago, a SWPL-type would hide the fact that she dated a black guy if she even did, but now, they’ll state it like it’s a badge of how anti-racist they are.
This is an easy meme to push through indirect routes and Business Insider’s favorite porn performer, James Deen. Recall, he went to the AVN awards and brought a journalist as his date. After being used, fellated, and fostered by the media, they now have a willing tattle tale. Business Insider did an article on pornography’s big race problem. Note that two years ago BI said it was still taboo with logical reasons. Deen bragged on twitter about registering a complaint, and oy vey, the media listened to him by pumping out the article. Many people wondered who the next Jenna Jameson would be, never thinking it may be a man, and a much more useful idiot to push for porn mainstreaming. What is this big race problem in porn?
The race problem is not peddling horrible stereotypes in many films. The problem is not about the absence of Asian men. The race problem is not quasi-rape or gang rape scenes that are 5-on-1 gangbangs where a girl “gets lost” and is swarmed. The race problem is not titles like “Ghetto Gaggers” where young black girls have sex with white men with a subtext of force. No, it is about non-blacks not wanting to do scenes with blacks. Shucks. Go figure. At the heart of so much progressive angst is the desperate attempt to integrate blacks and normalize or excuse their behavior. It is a contrast of preference vs. racism. The performers, just like the gays in the above article articulate a preference, but the media frames it as racist. Deen went so far as to tweet that preference can cause racism through influence.
Deen is a tool of the system used to normalize porn for female consumption. He is wilfully being ignorant of the influence his entire industry has had in the era of free Internet porn on the American sexual landscape. The article frames Deen as the honest producer trying to shoot scenes and these damn racist (his word) women won’t shoot an IR scene. No one bothered to dig into the percentage of blacks who test positive for STDs in the industry, the percentage of blacks who are escorting on the side for men, as well as other “random” facts that might cause a partner to be cautious filming sex, just as one would with a date.
The media describes it simply as racist and wrong. That is the message they want to get across to you, the reader. Deen is the chosen good guy to tell you how he is trying to fight the good progressive fight, but these racist women won’t cooperate and shoot with his actors. Deen supposedly is a good guy who cares about performer health, but why does he never advocate for a adult video performer union or guild that would standardize the industry and protect performers? Weird. Deen actually exhibits the traditional stereotype of the slimy, Jewish guy pushing women into doing things they don’t really want to do (quick, call the consent-focused feminists). I think Weimar Germany had this problem, too.
There is a deeper problem, and it strikes at the heart of the egalitarian zealots. People dig what they dig and dig attractive people. Attractiveness is not evenly spread. It is not evenly spread within groups, and it is not evenly spread between groups. Eventually, some groups are going to be considered slightly more desirable than others. This can be seen in the data tables of interracial marriage and divorce rates confirming every stereotype you ever held on those pairings (only table missing is wife’s BMI). This can be seen in OKCupid studies. Like seeks like, but there are some multicultural winners, losers, and unrequited chasers. In a multicultural society, one can find beautiful people of all ethnicities, but the frequency of what one considers attractive will vary greatly. Members of the groups not considered as attractive will be angry and call it unfair.
This is all hypocritical after a multi-decade push to say that people should be free and have the right to marry whoever they want to. #LoveWins. The entire gay movement crowd was wrapped in the sexual revolution and liberation of old, traditional shackles. No one accuses heteros who don’t have same-sex relations homophobes–well, at least not yet.
What is evident is that the progressives of Weimerica do not dislike traditions and authorities enforcing sexual norms and mores. They just dislike it when they do not control the authorities.
This is Weimerica, not America. It is not just enough to say you’re not racist. It is not just enough to say you’re health-conscious and practice safe sex. It is not enough to donate to causes and show up at protests as part of the rainbow coalition. One must take lovers of the coalition. One must truly show commitment and program the party into their identity! One must reject traditional ingroup orientation and welcome in the new ingroup. The party and its members are your family, are your tribe, and are your lovers. Your preferences and tastes matter not. Your health and aversion to catching a terminal illness are not priorities.
Your free will to make decisions for your life and individuality must be surrendered for the party’s utopian vision.